On Oct 30, 2007, at 13:49 , Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
On 30 Oct 2007, at 18:39, Rick Macklem wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007, Michael Tuexen wrote:
[snip]
Just fyi, here's an "ls -l" for 10.4.9 on Intel. Despite the size
difference, the kernel from sources seems to work fine on the
hardware we have. (Does the vanilla one have more stuff linked in,
instead of loading kexts? Haven't a clue.)
Your comparison is flawed. You are comparing a single arch kernel
(mach_kernel) with a bi-arch kernel (mach_kernel.org).
Run:
file /mach_kernel
file /mach_kernel.orig
Better yet, use 'size' or 'otool'. Just looking at the byte count on
the disk won't show you what is going on inside the file, and for
executables, I think you want to see that data.
You don't really need to use 'lipo' to see what the content is.
Justin
--
Justin C. Walker, Curmudgeon-At-Large
Institute for the Enhancement of the Director's Income
--------
Experience is what you get
when you don't get what you want.
--------
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-kernel mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-kernel/email@hidden
